30 - 40 fps on crysis

O.K. i need help quick i´m ordering a graphics card and my time is limited.. I´m wanting a graphic card to run crysis on about 30 - 40 frames per second or higher.. Willthe 8800gt series do it?? Looking at the alpha dog xfx, or the evga superclocked..

My specs - 2 gig ram

2.4ghz intel core 2 duo

and the res is 1024 x 1028..

What will i need to run it full?

O.K. i need help quick i´m ordering a graphics card and my time is limited.. I´m wanting a graphic card to run crysis on about 30 - 40 frames per second or higher.. Willthe 8800gt series do it?? Looking at the alpha dog xfx, or the evga superclocked..

My specs - 2 gig ram

2.4ghz intel core 2 duo

and the res is 1024 x 1028..

What will i need to run it full?

BAm-bAM_

I guess you have E6600. If that the processor you have, you will run Everything in High + 2X AA @ 1024x768 resolution.

25-40FPS but sometimes it will drop below 20FPS

[QUOTE="BAm-bAM_"]

O.K. i need help quick i´m ordering a graphics card and my time is limited.. I´m wanting a graphic card to run crysis on about 30 - 40 frames per second or higher.. Willthe 8800gt series do it?? Looking at the alpha dog xfx, or the evga superclocked..

My specs - 2 gig ram

2.4ghz intel core 2 duo

and the res is 1024 x 1028..

What will i need to run it full?

LahiruD

I guess you have E6600. If that the processor you have, you will run Everything in High + 2X AA @ 1024x768 resolution.

25-40FPS but sometimes it will drop below 20FPS

Cool but what is the quickest/best card of that series out now??

[QUOTE="LahiruD"][QUOTE="BAm-bAM_"]

O.K. i need help quick i´m ordering a graphics card and my time is limited.. I´m wanting a graphic card to run crysis on about 30 - 40 frames per second or higher.. Willthe 8800gt series do it?? Looking at the alpha dog xfx, or the evga superclocked..

My specs - 2 gig ram

2.4ghz intel core 2 duo

and the res is 1024 x 1028..

What will i need to run it full?

BAm-bAM_

I guess you have E6600. If that the processor you have, you will run Everything in High + 2X AA @ 1024x768 resolution.

25-40FPS but sometimes it will drop below 20FPS

Cool but what is the quickest/best card of that series out now??

Cool but what is the quickest/best card of that series out now??

Sorry i meant of the 8800gt series? Whats the quickest for instance EVGA superclocked, or XFX alpha dog ? Or any other one you guys know of..

BAm-bAM_

Cool but what is the quickest/best card of that series out now??

Sorry i meant of the 8800gt series? Whats the quickest for instance EVGA superclocked, or XFX alpha dog ? Or any other one you guys know of..

its really a matter of preference...i prefer EVGA just because i've never had a problem with themEvz0rz

And how do you run crysis??

[QUOTE="BAm-bAM_"]

Thinker_145

Cool but what is the quickest/best card of that series out now??

Sorry i meant of the 8800gt series? Whats the quickest for instance EVGA superclocked, or XFX alpha dog ? Or any other one you guys know of..

Thanx for that, if that the quickest then ill go for it.. Plushere its $150 cheaper

[QUOTE="Evz0rz"]its really a matter of preference...i prefer EVGA just because i've never had a problem with themBAm-bAM_

And how do you run crysis??

pretty well...ill get 30+ except for times with a lot of things going on.. the only thing i have on high are shaders, textures , and object quality, everything else is very high

edit: i also have shadows on high but you dont even notice that

[QUOTE="BAm-bAM_"]

[QUOTE="Evz0rz"]its really a matter of preference...i prefer EVGA just because i've never had a problem with themEvz0rz

And how do you run crysis??

pretty well...ill get 30+ except for times with a lot of things going on.. the only thing i have on high are shaders, textures , and object quality, everything else is very high

edit: i also have shadows on high but you dont even notice that

[QUOTE="Evz0rz"][QUOTE="BAm-bAM_"]

[QUOTE="Evz0rz"]its really a matter of preference...i prefer EVGA just because i've never had a problem with themThinker_145

And how do you run crysis??

pretty well...ill get 30+ except for times with a lot of things going on.. the only thing i have on high are shaders, textures , and object quality, everything else is very high

edit: i also have shadows on high but you dont even notice that

yeah theres a few setting that look almost identicle between high and very high IMO

[QUOTE="Thinker_145"][QUOTE="Evz0rz"][QUOTE="BAm-bAM_"]

[QUOTE="Evz0rz"]its really a matter of preference...i prefer EVGA just because i've never had a problem with themEvz0rz

And how do you run crysis??

pretty well...ill get 30+ except for times with a lot of things going on.. the only thing i have on high are shaders, textures , and object quality, everything else is very high

edit: i also have shadows on high but you dont even notice that

yeah theres a few setting that look almost identicle between high and very high IMO

I may have a different opinion on this when i play the whole game with all very high settings which i plan to do,although not sure whether i'll be able to sustain that torturous performance.

When I play on all high @ 1280x960 I rarely dip below 35FPS, average is about 45. I have the EVGA 8800GT superclocked.

When I got my BFG 8800GT OC I just installed the drivers that came on the disk and tried to play Crysis immediatly (I was too excited), the game ran fine on all high setting. However after installing the new Nvidea drivers and I might be crazy but the game does not look as good, and even seems to run a little bit slower. Does anybody else feel so?

Also I know this is off topic but is a good 500watt PSU that came in my Antec Sonata III case enough for the card and an E6750 processor, since (before the new drivers) I was seeing crashes in all of my games with the same error, that reboot the computer, I am just worried that it might be a hardware issue.

The 169.25 drivers are not, good, rool back to 169.21.hacker_xyzzy

How would I do that?

Here are some comparisons I did on my own PC, both in Vista.

1024x768, everything very high, DX10, no AA: http://img180.imageshack.us/img180/898/crysis641024vhho7.jpg

1600x1200, everything high, DX9, no AA: http://img511.imageshack.us/img511/5254/crysis641600hxn4.jpg

DX10 seems pretty pointless, as does very high settings with the performance hit. Get higher FPS at 1600x1200, which looks so much better, 1024x768 looks terrible to me no matter what you do to it. 1280x960 was ok, but if you have a monitor that handles higher res, still think it's better to lower a few things and step up.

Here are some comparisons I did on my own PC, both in Vista.

1024x768, everything very high, DX10, no AA: http://img180.imageshack.us/img180/898/crysis641024vhho7.jpg

1600x1200, everything high, DX9, no AA: http://img511.imageshack.us/img511/5254/crysis641600hxn4.jpg

DX10 seems pretty pointless, as does very high settings with the performance hit. Get higher FPS at 1600x1200, which looks so much better, 1024x768 looks terrible to me no matter what you do to it. 1280x960 was ok, but if you have a monitor that handles higher res, still think it's better to lower a few things and step up.

BeavermanA

And medium settings simply FAIL.

Here are some comparisons I did on my own PC, both in Vista.

1024x768, everything very high, DX10, no AA: http://img180.imageshack.us/img180/898/crysis641024vhho7.jpg

1600x1200, everything high, DX9, no AA: http://img511.imageshack.us/img511/5254/crysis641600hxn4.jpg

DX10 seems pretty pointless, as does very high settings with the performance hit. Get higher FPS at 1600x1200, which looks so much better, 1024x768 looks terrible to me no matter what you do to it. 1280x960 was ok, but if you have a monitor that handles higher res, still think it's better to lower a few things and step up.

BeavermanA

Here are some comparisons I did on my own PC, both in Vista.

1024x768, everything very high, DX10, no AA: http://img180.imageshack.us/img180/898/crysis641024vhho7.jpg

1600x1200, everything high, DX9, no AA: http://img511.imageshack.us/img511/5254/crysis641600hxn4.jpg

DX10 seems pretty pointless, as does very high settings with the performance hit. Get higher FPS at 1600x1200, which looks so much better, 1024x768 looks terrible to me no matter what you do to it. 1280x960 was ok, but if you have a monitor that handles higher res, still think it's better to lower a few things and step up.

BeavermanA

A 512 MB 8800GT from Nvidia (nothing OCd or superclocked) will do you fine. I get 50FPS average with mine (everything is on HIGH and I run it on 1600x1000 resolution no AA). It sometimes dips to 30 some at the worst but thats fine. chester706

How is my comparison unfair? The game would be crawling if I turned AA on at 1024x768 with those settings, so that's not an option. Low res just looks like crap, you don't need AA at higher res.

Here's 1024x768 DX10 4xAA on all high: http://img161.imageshack.us/img161/1390/crysis6410244aapm9.jpg

Put your desktop at 1024x768 and compare the 3, it'll scale down the 16x12. Really can't see any difference in detail, and running a higher res, with more fps I might add, looks so much better. Maybe people have crappy monitors or something, but I can't stand 1024x768 no matter what's done to it. With an 8800GT 1280x960 should be doable, I have the G92 GTS overclocked to 800/2160. Your fps do go down progressively with each level, in the first I average 50, by the end of the game it's down to 25-30 @ 1600x1200 on all high settings, but still playable in XP, it's too jerky in Vista with only 2GB of mem.

Am I missing something? Crysis64 uses directx 10 does it not? Does using "high" as opposed to "very high" actually change the drivers it's rendering with? You have to have DX10 to unlock "very high", yes, but does "high" only call DX10's DX9 emulators? I don't know that much about different Crysis renderers, but I thought Crysis64 used DX10 render calls only. Can you shed some light on this?

Am I missing something? Crysis64 uses directx 10 does it not? Does using "high" as opposed to "very high" actually change the drivers it's rendering with? You have to have DX10 to unlock "very high", yes, but does "high" only call DX10's DX9 emulators? I don't know that much about different Crysis renderers, but I thought Crysis64 used DX10 render calls only. Can you shed some light on this?

nwilde

Crysis 64bit can use DX 9 or DX 10.

And going to high settings in DX 10 still keeps you with the DX 10 renderer (it's actually a bit slower then the DX 9 renderer, or at least that's what I found).

How is my comparison unfair? The game would be crawling if I turned AA on at 1024x768 with those settings, so that's not an option. Low res just looks like crap, you don't need AA at higher res.

Here's 1024x768 DX10 4xAA on all high: http://img161.imageshack.us/img161/1390/crysis6410244aapm9.jpg

Put your desktop at 1024x768 and compare the 3, it'll scale down the 16x12. Really can't see any difference in detail, and running a higher res, with more fps I might add, looks so much better. Maybe people have crappy monitors or something, but I can't stand 1024x768 no matter what's done to it. With an 8800GT 1280x960 should be doable, I have the G92 GTS overclocked to 800/2160. Your fps do go down progressively with each level, in the first I average 50, by the end of the game it's down to 25-30 @ 1600x1200 on all high settings, but still playable in XP, it's too jerky in Vista with only 2GB of mem.

BeavermanA

I did try high settings in 16x12 and 2xAA and it blew me away honestly.But with my card that's not a possiblity.And no matter what the resolution to me 2xAA always makes a difference from no AA.In your pic of 16x12,the edges of the trees are clearly jagged more than what i see with 2xAA in 10x7.And 10x7 honestly looks fine to me.What monitor are you using?

I'd much rather lower some settings to play at 1600x1200. Never really notice any difference with AA on or off at higher res. 1024x768 is just so pixelated, especially the further away objects are. I guess you're using a 17" CRT? That's probably why, 1024x768 is more meant for that, I have one on my desk but I still think playing games on it like ET when a friend is over doesn't look very good. I'm on the Diamond Pro 2070 SB 22" CRT by Mitsubishi. It's a high quality CRT for gaming, does 2048x1536@85Hz, sadly I cannot play Crysis at that. Got like 4 fps, and hung when I tried to do 8xAA lol. BeavermanA

But man 85hz at 20x15.That has got to be the best gaming monitor one could have.I would settile for 12x10 on a 22".And you can remove some of the pixelation affect by sitting a little far from the monitor.:)